The great genetic fudge of Dr. He

What the Chinese entrepreneur did He jiankui at
edit the DNA two girls before birth

-It's really done, what he has not shown is no technical difficulty or medical or scientific merit. This is comparable to what the Italian embryologist Severino Antinori did when he announced in 2002, also without evidence, that he had cloned human embryos and implanted them in three women .

Both Antinori and He have now used a technique invented by others and claim to have applied it to the sensitive soil of the river.man-assisted production, becoming famous for a few days. Antinori was left in the trash of history as fake; The last time he made the headlines two years ago was because he had been arrested, accused of forcibly extracting female eggs from women. A 24-year-old nurse who was working at her clinic in Milan.

It is too early to know how it will be. But its media irruption has put back on the table the old debate on what is allowed to do and not to do. human embryos. Specialists in embryology, reproductive medicine, molecular biology and bioethics agree that medical and scientific advances are applied to prevent and treat diseases. There is also a consensus that egg, sperm and embryo actions should not pose a risk to future generations.

There is a broad consensus that DNA modification can be applied to prevent and treat diseases.

These consensuses were enshrined in the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, approved in Oviedo in 1997 and signed by 35 countries, which is the only legally binding international agreement for human rights. protection of human rights in the field of biomedicine. In Article 13, entitled "Interventions on the Human Genome", it is stated that "an intervention aimed at modifying the human genome can only be carried out for preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic purposes and only if its purpose is not to introduce a modification of the genome of man. " no descendants. "

An example that meets both the requirements (medical objectives and the safety of future generations) is preimplantation genetic diagnosis. The technique, authorized in Spain by the law on assisted procreation, consists in analyzing the DNA of an embryo before implanting it in the uterus in order to make sure that 39; he is not carrying a serious hereditary disease. On the other hand, cloning is illegal because it does not prevent or treat any disease and may also result in changes that would be passed on to the offspring.

Dr. He's experience does not meet either of these two requirements. The Chinese entrepreneur says his intervention aims to modify the CCR5 gene so that people born with the modified genome can not contract AIDS. But one of the girls who is born is still vulnerable to HIV because she has one of two copies of the intact gene that he knew or should have known before implanting the embryo. In addition, there are other effective ways to prevent AIDS. And by inactivating CCR5, the vulnerability of girls to other viruses such as influenza or West Nile has increased. Therefore, the genetic editing that he has done has no medical justification.

The use of the technique on embryos is rejected because of the risk of causing unwanted damage to subsequent generations

Regarding the second condition, the CRISPR-Cas9 genetic editing technique that he used involves a risk of undesirable mutations that will be passed on to subsequent generations. Therefore, it is not consistent either. It is precisely because of this risk of serious side effects that the UNESCO Bioethics Committee called for a moratorium three years ago on the non-implementation of genetic editing. eggs, embryos and sperm for the moment. In the same spirit, the participants in the 1st International Summit on Human Genetics brought together researchers from more than twenty countries, including China, in 2015. It is surprising that the forum that He chose to present his experience, after flagrantly violating the recommendations made at this first congress, the Second International Summit on Human Genetics being held this week in Hong Kong.

The CRISPR-Cas9 technique, which makes it possible to modify DNA quickly, easily and at a lower cost, remains "a promising technology that could potentially benefit society," said David Liu of the Broad Institute of EE in Hong Kong. United States, in statements to the Associated Press.

But these benefits will come earlier to treat diseases in adult cells, where possible side effects will be limited, than to prevent them in eggs, sperm and embryos. And of course, bioethics experts agree, this technique should in no way be used to improve the human species by modifying non-pathological features such as beauty, intelligence or skin color .